Johnson seemed to alternate between being pretty damn fast and then hovering around the 86/87mph mark, whereas Siddle seemed to be more consistent.

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

1) Had double pneumonia as a kid, as did my twin sis. Doctors told my parents to pray that we lived through the night. Dad said **** off, I'm an atheist, you ****s better save my kids, etc. Then prayed anyway.

For me it seems stupid making Lee sit on the sidelines. Have great regard for that guy. If he has played his last test for Australia I beleive they are repeating the same mistake they made with Hayden. Forcing a guy out before he is done. Australia could afford doing this earlier, but at the moment I don't think so.

For me it seems stupid making Lee sit on the sidelines. Have great regard for that guy. If he has played his last test for Australia I beleive they are repeating the same mistake they made with Hayden. Forcing a guy out before he is done. Australia could afford doing this earlier, but at the moment I don't think so.

Siddle was making his debut in India, I said at the time that he didn't look very good, but he's come on leaps and bounds since then and its important to remember that hes only played 4 series, and hes not yet 25. Hes leap years ahead of Johnson at the same point of his career, and I would say he is a better bowler than Johnson period.

Regarding what he does with the ball, you are right, his strength is moving the ball off the seam, although he does get the ball to swing in towards the batter and he bowls fairly close to 90mph. Over time he will build on those attributes, which is why it is important to give him the confidence to do so, because he has a decent action and has the foundations to be a very good bowler in the future.

This. Top post.

WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie

"Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn

Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.

Would love to see Lee back, but in order for him to play they would need to drop Johnson or play 4 pacers. I simply cannot see them do either, especially after the disaster at the Oval, Hauritz will play until they realize that he's not going to be very useful on Australian pitches.

Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!

Personally I would bring Lee in for Clark and leave the rest alone for the first 2 Tests vs the West Indies. I would have brought back Hughes and put Watson at 4 until Hussey hit 121 in his last bat, so he deserves a few more Tests to see if he has actually turned it around.

Siddle was making his debut in India, I said at the time that he didn't look very good, but he's come on leaps and bounds since then and its important to remember that hes only played 4 series, and hes not yet 25. Hes leap years ahead of Johnson at the same point of his career, and I would say he is a better bowler than Johnson period.

Regarding what he does with the ball, you are right, his strength is moving the ball off the seam, although he does get the ball to swing in towards the batter and he bowls fairly close to 90mph. Over time he will build on those attributes, which is why it is important to give him the confidence to do so, because he has a decent action and has the foundations to be a very good bowler in the future.

Yeah I agree, I think Johnson has to improve quite a bit on his current form otherwise I'd be in favour of dropping him and bringing Lee/Bollinger in to replace him. Would keep Siddle in the team with Hilfenhaus.

R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best

R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi

Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath

"How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.

"There's more chance of SoC making a good post than Smith averaging 99.95." - Furball

I arrived in London mid-way through the first days play at Lords which was an absolutely disgraceful perfomance from Oz.

That night, I spent in the company of very senior people from CA who made it absolutely clear that:

a. Oz's performance in SA was held in very high regard;

b. Youth was the key to our future;

c. Ponting is there for as long as he chooses to be (2011 minimum, 2013 if they lost the current series);

d. Clarke is hated at the highest level

Bottom line is that Clark has played his last test, Hussey maybe, Nielsen safe for the time being

This last point is interesting, any idea why?

They do realise the SA series is over don't they? I can see why they might hold it in high regard as it highlights the potential some of our young players have. But there must be a limit to the leeway it gives them for future series surely.

I arrived in London mid-way through the first days play at Lords which was an absolutely disgraceful perfomance from Oz.

That night, I spent in the company of very senior people from CA who made it absolutely clear that:

a. Oz's performance in SA was held in very high regard;

b. Youth was the key to our future;

c. Ponting is there for as long as he chooses to be (2011 minimum, 2013 if they lost the current series);

d. Clarke is hated at the highest level

Bottom line is that Clark has played his last test, Hussey maybe, Nielsen safe for the time being

Who cares about CA? Their job is to administer the game. To market it and grow it.

Doesn't surprise CA hate M. Clarke. If he wasnt such a good bat he would fall into the Chris Rogers/Brad Hodge category of "not fitting in with the team". Suppose he's not bland or boring enough to be held in high regard by CA.